But it's not even a matter of money. I'm still waiting for a plausible explanation to the fact that Russia hasn't yet blown up the bridges over the Dnieper.
> But of course, banks do not create new capital, they only create new claims to what capital exists within a nation. The 65 percent rise in money supply in just 32 months bakes in a ruble devaluation
Russia can afford to ignore monetary supply issues, given it is the rare self-sufficient country amongst the many in the world.
Russia would need a strong ruble only in case it needed to pick up resources or products on the global international markets, but as a matter of fact most of what it needs can be harvested from within the country. If anything, the main bottleneck is availability of workforce in necessary numbers to staff industry, and exploit natural resources to the required levels.
Hence Russia can afford Keynesian economic manoeuvres, which is essentially what you are describing they are doing in this piece.
Well said.
But it's not even a matter of money. I'm still waiting for a plausible explanation to the fact that Russia hasn't yet blown up the bridges over the Dnieper.
> But of course, banks do not create new capital, they only create new claims to what capital exists within a nation. The 65 percent rise in money supply in just 32 months bakes in a ruble devaluation
Russia can afford to ignore monetary supply issues, given it is the rare self-sufficient country amongst the many in the world.
Russia would need a strong ruble only in case it needed to pick up resources or products on the global international markets, but as a matter of fact most of what it needs can be harvested from within the country. If anything, the main bottleneck is availability of workforce in necessary numbers to staff industry, and exploit natural resources to the required levels.
Hence Russia can afford Keynesian economic manoeuvres, which is essentially what you are describing they are doing in this piece.